There is a certain level of coding involved. They have to actually add code that blocks a certain piece of kode, that in turn must enable itself in a few days for a limited number of players.
And then there is the shutdown of the server, and restablishing it... That can take a while too
Sounds easy "Just to remove an emote", sure... But the reality is quite diffrent.
No its not some conspiracy.
Such complex server codes that access huge databases take time to properly shutdown and restart.
Its nothing like starting a program on a desktop to work with. Plus its most likely separated into several component on several machines that need to be brought down and up in a specific order.
maintenance is not just about applying a patch, they also do stuff in the background to make sure the game runs smoothly and does not fall over.
just because its not mentioned on a patch note does not mean other stuff is not going on.
Most of the other online games I play don't have down time to release server side patches. The patch is mainly done client side.
The thing that gets me is that you now have to use an item to get the emote.. what was wrong with a straight emote that was locked so only those elligable to use it, could use it, Like KHAAANNNN!!!, or Bloodwine or etc, etc...
Just how many device slots do they think a ship has?
The maintenance is weekly, the patch is not. However, if there is a patch, I hoped they would add a bit more into the patch, such as fixing some spelling errors (Mylasa SYSTEM, not SECTOR) etc. It would be the purrrrrfect chance to clean up some mistakes which don't affect gameplay at all.
The thing that gets me is that you now have to use an item to get the emote.. what was wrong with a straight emote that was locked so only those elligable to use it, could use it, Like KHAAANNNN!!!, or Bloodwine or etc, etc...
Just how many device slots do they think a ship has?
Maybe thats exactly the point. People already got agitatet because of the whole fireworks spamming. So maybe Cryptic is trying to reduce that for the future. That way people have to think about using a slot for this or not. Personally i think it would be better, if the fireworks emote had a recharge time. But maybe they cant do this with emotes, and that is the reason why they bound it to an ships item. I dont know.
I guess background patching is such a TRIBBLE idea to implement? I refuse to believe that an entire game needs to be shut down and restarted for such minor issues...
Mind you the engine is TRIBBLE...
You seriously believe they would bring down the servers for just an emote fix? :rolleyes:
The patch notes are only that PATCH NOTES, they only tell you whats in the new patch.
It does not tell you all the other things they do during maitenence that may involve any number of things.
Still... It only covers what was done in the patch... Not all the background work, or the patchnote would be somthing like:
DStahl said: We need to kill off the fireworks emote
- Stormshade: Good idea. It was supposed to be for veterans only
- Unimportant Cryptic Employee (don't exist... humor me): So, im geussing it....
You are of course considering that a secondary issue might not have crept up while they were bringing the servers back online forcing a prolonged downtime. Of course it might just be that its all meant specifically to keep you from playing
Didn't even need to read the post, but look at the OP to know this would be a complaint thread. As others have pointed out, stuff happens when they change anything in the game. They cannot promise that things will work each and every time they take something out, or add something in.
Nataku if the game is so awful then quit, it's that simple. Those of us who post here enjoy playing the game and actually UNDERSTAND the need for maintenance.
Based off of the current cryptic set up and engine being utilized, it is a far better idea to bring er down then back up. This way nobody experiences Char losses and such. Like previously stated it requires a mountain of code/decoding. Its like pumping gas with a lit cigerette hanging out of your mouth and the engine running. They could probably keep it up while they patch......but is it a good idea?
Do not know what else can be said about the 2 hour maintenance to remove an in-game emote...
Yeah, that is kind of stupid. Glad I am not missing out on much having skipped out a few months - I don't see "fireworks" as much of a reward. Then again, I expected nothing else since as a LTS of CO I got given the most rubbish veteran rewards given my loyalty.
Yeah, that is kind of stupid. Glad I am not missing out on much having skipped out a few months - I don't see "fireworks" as much of a reward. Then again, I expected nothing else since as a LTS of CO I got given the most rubbish veteran rewards given my loyalty.
Based off of the current cryptic set up and engine being utilized, it is a far better idea to bring er down then back up. This way nobody experiences Char losses and such. Like previously stated it requires a mountain of code/decoding. Its like pumping gas with a lit cigerette hanging out of your mouth and the engine running. They could probably keep it up while they patch......but is it a good idea?
Nope
Nothing wrong with smoking while filling up.
A cigarette does not burn hot enough to ignite gas.
In fact, back in the old days people always used to smoke whie filling up. Heck even the attendant would do so as he filled your tank for you.
It wasn't until some regulator declared that a cigarette had caused some freak accident as justification for some useless feel-good regulation. More then likely just so he could say he did something during his time sapping away tax payer dollars.
In fact I believe cigarettes only cause fires in the state of California.
A cigarette does not burn hot enough to ignite gas.
In fact, back in the old days people always used to smoke whie filling up. Heck even the attendant would do so as he filled your tank for you.
It wasn't until some regulator declared that a cigarette had caused some freak accident as justification for some useless feel-good regulation. More then likely just so he could say he did something during his time sapping away tax payer dollars.
In fact I believe cigarettes only cause fires in the state of California.
Today, people are just ignorant to the truth.
Correct here. How do you Americans call things like this? Urban legends?
Al tho, smoking a cigarette while working with a highly volatile substance now there's something else... it may provide considerable amusement for the more sarcastic buggers among us when some poor TRIBBLE lights himself ablaze, it doesn't do wonders for the victim's health.
Google search yeilded a contraidctory answer from a couple established physicists. I wonder who would be correct here? I am going to go with the physicists with doctorates and masters degrees myself:
We performed a series of experiments in order to determine the actual temperature of the lit cigarette. Here are the results for the temperature at different locations and under different conditions:
Temperature without drawing:
Side of the lit portion: 400 deg C (or 752 deg F)
Middle of the lit portion: 580 deg C (or 1112 deg F)
Temperature during drawing:
Middle of the lit portion: 700 deg C (or 1292 deg F)
The above numbers represent the average we obtained by performing several trials and can be considered accurate to within 50 deg C. A standard Fe-CuNi digital thermocouple thermometer was used in all trials.
The Autoignition Temperature of a standard unleaded gasoline can be anywhere from 260 to 460 degrees C (or 500 to 860 deg F) as quoted on the FAQ: Automotive Gasoline Web Page by Bruce Hamilton (this page is also an excellent and accurate resource about the science of gasoline)
So as you can see the temperature of the cigarette, even at the side of the lit portion, is more than enough to cause gasoline to autoignite. However, there are many other factors that one should take into account. It matters how the cigarette actually falls onto the surface to the gasoline. There is a lower chance of autoignition if the cigarette falls on it's side where the temperature is lower. Also, the temperature of the gasoline itself matters. If the gasoline is cold to start with then there is again a lower chance of autoignition. One should also consider the amount of the gasoline that you have, namely if you have a large volume of gasoline that would mean that the there is enough surrounding liquid for the heat to go into and therefore the temperature of the gasoline-cigar contact spot would due to heat conduction of the gasoline decrease rapidly, therefore reducing the chance for autoignition. On the contrary, if you have a nice thin film of the gasoline, the chances of the autoignition increase. Also, the evaporation of the gasoline at the point of the contact will also act to reduce the actual contact temperature rapidly.
We are aware of at least one experimental trial (conducted by our colleague at the university) where the gasoline did not ignite upon contact with a lit cigar. This just means that all of the above conditions were not in favour of the ignition.
However, It is important to realize that the gasoline vapour has a much lower autoignition temperature than the gasoline itself. Namely, if you spill gasoline on a hot road (say in the hot summer day) you will be able to ignite gasoline by contact with a cigarette easily, just because of the gasoline vapour layer that would be produced above the surface of the gasoline. Not to even mention throwing the cigarette into the container with gasoline that has been closed for some time and is therefore full of gasoline vapours.
So for all of you smokers out there that are wondering why you are not allowed to smoke at gas pump stations, these are the real scientific reasons. It is dangerous and science is telling us that the temperature of the cigarette, given the appropriate conditions, is enough to cause gasoline to autoignite (and in case of the gas pump station this would be disastrous.)
So, Mike it looks like John Grisham has done his homework before writing his book.
WARNING: All above mentioned experiments were performed by professionals under controlled conditions and with proper precautions. You are in no way to attempt this on your own. This is dangerous and you can cause serious injuries to yourself and others. PhysLink and its authors will not be held responsible.
PhysLink would like to thank Dr. Michael Ewart for his kind assistance in performing these experiments.
Answered by: Dr. Michael Ewart, Researcher at the University of Southern California and Anton Skorucak, Creator & Editor of PhysLink
Google search yeilded a contraidctory answer from a couple established physicists. I wonder who would be correct here? I am going to go with the physicists with doctorates and masters degrees myself:
Comments
There is a certain level of coding involved. They have to actually add code that blocks a certain piece of kode, that in turn must enable itself in a few days for a limited number of players.
And then there is the shutdown of the server, and restablishing it... That can take a while too
Sounds easy "Just to remove an emote", sure... But the reality is quite diffrent.
Such complex server codes that access huge databases take time to properly shutdown and restart.
Its nothing like starting a program on a desktop to work with. Plus its most likely separated into several component on several machines that need to be brought down and up in a specific order.
just because its not mentioned on a patch note does not mean other stuff is not going on.
The thing that gets me is that you now have to use an item to get the emote.. what was wrong with a straight emote that was locked so only those elligable to use it, could use it, Like KHAAANNNN!!!, or Bloodwine or etc, etc...
Just how many device slots do they think a ship has?
Bugs galore will be squashed, typos spell-checked and pre-patches will be applied for features to come.
Rejoice! For the great Lord Maintenance will slowly but surely, patch by patch, make this great game even more wondrous!
You seriously believe they would bring down the servers for just an emote fix? :rolleyes:
The patch notes are only that PATCH NOTES, they only tell you whats in the new patch.
It does not tell you all the other things they do during maitenence that may involve any number of things.
DStahl said: We need to kill off the fireworks emote
- Stormshade: Good idea. It was supposed to be for veterans only
- Unimportant Cryptic Employee (don't exist... humor me): So, im geussing it....
you get the point...
- noun
1. Awesome
Must...do...dailies... lol
Fixing the emote thing is only a small percentage of the patch.
The vast majority consists of..........
Unpopular things / things they don't want us to know about.
Creating new bugs and glitches.
On a side note .. the lag last night was terrible so it was time for a server reset anyway.
Is the glass half empty or half full? Doesn't matter if your in the desert cause man...your gonna get a beautiful tan.
Love the hair...reminds me of home.......;)
Based off of the current cryptic set up and engine being utilized, it is a far better idea to bring er down then back up. This way nobody experiences Char losses and such. Like previously stated it requires a mountain of code/decoding. Its like pumping gas with a lit cigerette hanging out of your mouth and the engine running. They could probably keep it up while they patch......but is it a good idea?
Nope
Yeah, that is kind of stupid. Glad I am not missing out on much having skipped out a few months - I don't see "fireworks" as much of a reward. Then again, I expected nothing else since as a LTS of CO I got given the most rubbish veteran rewards given my loyalty.
You also get a "Free" extra character slot.
Nothing wrong with smoking while filling up.
A cigarette does not burn hot enough to ignite gas.
In fact, back in the old days people always used to smoke whie filling up. Heck even the attendant would do so as he filled your tank for you.
It wasn't until some regulator declared that a cigarette had caused some freak accident as justification for some useless feel-good regulation. More then likely just so he could say he did something during his time sapping away tax payer dollars.
In fact I believe cigarettes only cause fires in the state of California.
Today, people are just ignorant to the truth.
Correct here. How do you Americans call things like this? Urban legends?
Al tho, smoking a cigarette while working with a highly volatile substance now there's something else... it may provide considerable amusement for the more sarcastic buggers among us when some poor TRIBBLE lights himself ablaze, it doesn't do wonders for the victim's health.
LINK
We performed a series of experiments in order to determine the actual temperature of the lit cigarette. Here are the results for the temperature at different locations and under different conditions:
Temperature without drawing:
Side of the lit portion: 400 deg C (or 752 deg F)
Middle of the lit portion: 580 deg C (or 1112 deg F)
Temperature during drawing:
Middle of the lit portion: 700 deg C (or 1292 deg F)
The above numbers represent the average we obtained by performing several trials and can be considered accurate to within 50 deg C. A standard Fe-CuNi digital thermocouple thermometer was used in all trials.
The Autoignition Temperature of a standard unleaded gasoline can be anywhere from 260 to 460 degrees C (or 500 to 860 deg F) as quoted on the FAQ: Automotive Gasoline Web Page by Bruce Hamilton (this page is also an excellent and accurate resource about the science of gasoline)
So as you can see the temperature of the cigarette, even at the side of the lit portion, is more than enough to cause gasoline to autoignite. However, there are many other factors that one should take into account. It matters how the cigarette actually falls onto the surface to the gasoline. There is a lower chance of autoignition if the cigarette falls on it's side where the temperature is lower. Also, the temperature of the gasoline itself matters. If the gasoline is cold to start with then there is again a lower chance of autoignition. One should also consider the amount of the gasoline that you have, namely if you have a large volume of gasoline that would mean that the there is enough surrounding liquid for the heat to go into and therefore the temperature of the gasoline-cigar contact spot would due to heat conduction of the gasoline decrease rapidly, therefore reducing the chance for autoignition. On the contrary, if you have a nice thin film of the gasoline, the chances of the autoignition increase. Also, the evaporation of the gasoline at the point of the contact will also act to reduce the actual contact temperature rapidly.
We are aware of at least one experimental trial (conducted by our colleague at the university) where the gasoline did not ignite upon contact with a lit cigar. This just means that all of the above conditions were not in favour of the ignition.
However, It is important to realize that the gasoline vapour has a much lower autoignition temperature than the gasoline itself. Namely, if you spill gasoline on a hot road (say in the hot summer day) you will be able to ignite gasoline by contact with a cigarette easily, just because of the gasoline vapour layer that would be produced above the surface of the gasoline. Not to even mention throwing the cigarette into the container with gasoline that has been closed for some time and is therefore full of gasoline vapours.
So for all of you smokers out there that are wondering why you are not allowed to smoke at gas pump stations, these are the real scientific reasons. It is dangerous and science is telling us that the temperature of the cigarette, given the appropriate conditions, is enough to cause gasoline to autoignite (and in case of the gas pump station this would be disastrous.)
So, Mike it looks like John Grisham has done his homework before writing his book.
WARNING: All above mentioned experiments were performed by professionals under controlled conditions and with proper precautions. You are in no way to attempt this on your own. This is dangerous and you can cause serious injuries to yourself and others. PhysLink and its authors will not be held responsible.
PhysLink would like to thank Dr. Michael Ewart for his kind assistance in performing these experiments.
Answered by: Dr. Michael Ewart, Researcher at the University of Southern California and Anton Skorucak, Creator & Editor of PhysLink
ooooh Gothic 4 is so diffrent it doesn't deserve the bought name... bah!
Pfft Physicists know nothing when compared to forum knowledge.
This is true. It's even beyond a masive community patch.